If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Let's Talk About Why Your Tobito "Plotholes" Aren't Plotholes

Originally Posted by SlayerKisame

The whole Kisame thing where he revealed both Tobi's (short hair and long hair) to be the same person can also be explained with one thing: genjutsu. Do you remember that first scene, where Kisame looked directly at Tobi's "glowing sharingan"? Do you also remember that one scene with Itachi, Kisame, Kakashi, Kurenai, and Asuma, where Kakashi specifically said not to look into Itachi's sharingan because they would be trapped in a genjutsu? It's that easy to get trapped into genjutsu and we've seen it multiple times.

I'm not even sure why this is warranted as a plothole, but I guess some people don't understand "acting". You see, when someone says they are someone else and says a bunch of things that only that someone could have done, then they were probably referring to what that person did. Did that sound confusing? I bet it did. I'm saying that whatever Obito said while he was lying about being Madara were things that Madara said and did. For instance, Obito saying he convinced Yahiko to form Akatsuki and gave Nagato the rinnegan...those were things that Madara did. Again, use common sense. This isn't rocket science!

There's one that is particularly striking to me...the one where Madara says he awakened the rinnegan shortly before his death. And it was said that Nagato was given a pair of rinnegans. So, if Nagato was born before Obito and there was a huge time gap between the time Nagato got his rinnegan and Obito's birth, then how was Madara able to meet and train Obito? I can explain this easily. Where was it said that Madara was able to awaken only one set of rinnegan? How do we know he didn't awaken two sets? What if Madara gave Nagato his eyes and told him to resurrect him later? Do we even know how you awaken the rinnegan? Exactly, we don't.

You see, if there is room for explanation, it's not a plothole. The simple fact is that many of you aren't being as open-minded as you can. So, I guess, I challenge you. I've heard of practically everything. I challenge you to give me a "plothole", I really do. Some of you need to be desensitized from this plotholes mindset, some you seriously need to!

Ehmm about the kisame thing, it doesn't really make sense. If tobi had decided to genjutsu kisame anyway, what was the point of him taking his mask of. Can't he just genjutsu kisame while keeping the mask on? He's got an awesome eyehole for that you know. He didn't take his mask of to genjutu other people (and kurama) either.

Also explain this one to me since your explanation about him awakening the rinnegan twice is also impossible. The rinnegan can only be achieved if one has obtained the EMS and has both uchiha and senju dna present in his body. Since he already fused his brother's eyes with his own, it's impossible to do it a second time. Therefore, gaining EMS is impossible. Even if he got his hands on another sharingan pair and he had another brother besides izuna, it would still be impossible since he doesn't have his own eyes anymore. The spare eyes are not his own, so fusing them with another siblings eyes wouldn't result in EMS, let alone if fusing would even be possible.

Now there are two possibilties here that screw with either the plot or the timeline. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Madara himself said that he awakened his eyes shortly before he died. If madara had awakened his rinnegan shortly before he died, it would mean that if these eyes ended up with nagato while he was a kid, madara could never have met obito since he wasn't born yet, while the manga shows they obviously know eachother. If he awakened his rinnegan shortly before he died after he had met obito which seems to be the case......It would either mean that nagato's rinnegan are his own, and madara didn't give him shit unlike what you are claiming

So you choose. Madara gave nagato his rinnegan, but never met obito. Or nagato's rinnegan is his own and your explanaton, of tobi being an actor, saying he did stuff that madara did (in this case giving nagato the rinnegan) is wrong.

Re: Let's Talk About Why Your Tobito "Plotholes" Aren't Plotholes

Originally Posted by scandalous'

Madara himself said that he awakened his eyes shortly before he died. If madara had awakened his rinnegan shortly before he died, it would mean that if these eyes ended up with nagato while he was a kid, madara could never have met obito since he wasn't born yet, while the manga shows they obviously know eachother. If he awakened his rinnegan shortly before he died after he had met obito which seems to be the case......It would either mean that nagato's rinnegan are his own, and madara didn't give him shit unlike what you are claiming

I think this "I gave Nagato his Rinnegan" is interpreted too literally...if the definition is loose, then Nagato obtaining the Rinnegan could've been done in lots of ways...we know Nagato is an Uzumaki, so could Madara have introduced some Uchiha blood in his family? Do we know if Nagato wasn't experimented on? Do we know if Madara wasn't Nagato's grandpa or something?(I know this last one is a bit stretching it, but still)

But let's say Madara indeed gave Nagato his Rinnegan, in the meaning that he pulled them out and put them inside Nagato(which by the way means that Nagato could've been subject to experiments like I mentioned before)...isn't it possible that Madara just lived on with a different pair off Sharingans? And then he met Obito?

I mean the Edo Tensei would resurrect you with your original eyes(or however Kishimoto wants), so the Edo Tensei argument can be thrown out the window...
On the matter of plotholes...the one thing I observed on these boards is that people don't use the term as the OP describes it, as in there's NO ROOM for explanation, but rather that there's no explanation at that point in time...

Most information in this whole debacle are just random statements, distorted truths, but there are strong hints pro Tobito and strong hints contra Tobito...and if Kishimoto sticks with the Obito direction, then as long as there will be glaring questions with this direction, then those issues will remain plotholes.

A plothole is a plothole until it's filled in with some plot, amirite...make this the quote of the day please...but it's not necessarily true...because even if the author deals with it somehow, it will still remain a plothole...why?

Because if it was a plothole in the first case, then it means that it broke an established logic of the plot...and an established logic is veeeeeeery subjective, even if large amount of people agree on one particular thing, and that is because, simply the interpretations differ... that's it...in this light Obito being Tobi is a plothole and will remain one for lots of people, even if the author will try to deal with it somehow...some things probably won't be explained, and those will be reasons...

Do I consider this a plothole? Frankly I don't like to rush things, and I don't like labeling things until I get an explanation...if there will still be questions regarding inconsistencies with the Obito direction, then I will call it a plothole, but not before...

Now the reason I wrote this chunk of text is because I would like to reply to the OP that there's an enormous amount of subjectivity involved in the discussions, especially if we don't have the entire picture, yet. So using phrases like "backing people into a corner" for example are useless and antagonistic, because at the end of each debate, after deconstructing every post there will be one key element in each idea that will differ. So if people don't reply then it doesn't mean that you've backed them into a corner, it just means that there is a key element that they don't agree with, and consider replying to your post, or submitting themselves to your logical framework as a useless action.

Or maybe it's just laziness, or maybe they don't like the tone of your post or maybe they consider you the biggest troll on earth or something. Who knows, the Internet is certainly a huuuge zoo.

In the light of this last sentence I would like to ask everyone who wanted or wants to post a cool, aggressive post, to loosen up a bit. There's no need for antagonistic posts, and I suppose I don't have to say why. We are all fans here and love or love to hate Naruto, so let's extend each other some courtesy in the tone of our posts.

Considering this topic and thread as a whole...this is a large subject to tackle, and there are elements in this topic that span at least half of the manga's plotline, just be careful not to wander to far into one particular detail, because that derails the discussion. Please try to address as many talking points as possible...literary technicalities are also welcome and many have approached the subject this way as well, so yeah, keep it going, it makes the discussion even more interesting.

Re: Let's Talk About Why Your Tobito "Plotholes" Aren't Plotholes

Originally Posted by benelori

I think this "I gave Nagato his Rinnegan" is interpreted too literally...if the definition is loose, then Nagato obtaining the Rinnegan could've been done in lots of ways...we know Nagato is an Uzumaki, so could Madara have introduced some Uchiha blood in his family? Do we know if Nagato wasn't experimented on? Do we know if Madara wasn't Nagato's grandpa or something?(I know this last one is a bit stretching it, but still)

But let's say Madara indeed gave Nagato his Rinnegan, in the meaning that he pulled them out and put them inside Nagato(which by the way means that Nagato could've been subject to experiments like I mentioned before)...isn't it possible that Madara just lived on with a different pair off Sharingans? And then he met Obito?

I mean the Edo Tensei would resurrect you with your original eyes(or however Kishimoto wants), so the Edo Tensei argument can be thrown out the window...

You make a fair point, and I do agree actually. My post was aimed at the OP's statement saying that madara could have awakened a second pair of rinnegan eyes after giving his first pair to nagato. Which like I pointed out is impossible.

Also madara did not live on with a different pair of sharingan since he died shortly after he awakened his rinnegan. Meaning, he awakened them shortly before or after he had met obito. Like I said, nagato's rinnegan are his own. By which method he awakened I obviously don't know, and we'll have to wait until kishi tells us. Like you said, there are several possibilities.

Re: Let's Talk About Why Your Tobito "Plotholes" Aren't Plotholes

SlayerKisame, I think most people disagree with you because...

The story of obito has progressed in a manner that does not make sense to most of the readers since some situations are either without explanation or are in contradiction to what the story has told us so far. Be it statements, drawings and timelines.

Things don't make sense and stuff that has previously happened, seem to be somewhat ignored by the writer himself when looking at his recent story telling. Therefore it's seems highly unlikely that it can be solved with writing that would be decent or good and would also fit the previously established story, statements, drawings and also the rules in the naruto universe.

For example, obito's survival and him being tobi just bumps with previous statements, drawings and plot and timeline. For example some of the points you have pointed out in your opening post.

But then you come in and reason like this...

Note: this is just an example, I'm not saying you said this but it aligns with how you reason.

Well guys obito was dying and suddenly the heavens opened up, god's hand came down and restored obito back to health, making him evil in the process. Nobody dare argue with me since I gave you an explanation and because it COULD have happened like this therefore it's not a plot hole any more....

Like I said, even if that's what happened, it would be a crap written story, just like your explanations would be if they were true, in my humble opinion. So people have every right to call it plot hole if the writer seems to be grabbing nonsense from wherever he can find it and put it on paper. Once again, in my humble opinion.

Also I wrote a reply regarding your opening post at the top of this page, if you would be so kind to respond to it please.